A Wife (Housewife) is not required to meet the same Strict Evidentiary Standard as an Ordinary Donee when a Husband Gifts Property to her --- Lahore High Court, Lahore
Islamabad 27-02-2025: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has set aside an Appellate Court’s decision in a contentious case concerning the cancellation of a gift mutation between a husband and wife, restoring the trial Court’s ruling in favor of the wife. The Court emphasized the presumption of good faith in spousal transactions and reiterated the burden of proof required to establish fraud.
The case involved a dispute between (Petitioner/wife) and (Respondent/husband). The Respondent had filed a suit challenging a gift mutation (No. 927 dated 29.01.2019) concerning 7 kanals, 15 marlas, and 204 sq. ft. of land, alleging that the petitioner fraudulently executed the gift with the connivance of revenue officials.
The trial Court dismissed the suit on February 10, 2024, holding that the allegations of fraud were unsubstantiated. However, on June 1, 2024, the appellate Court overturned this decision, canceling the gift mutation in favor of the wife. The matter was then brought before the Lahore High Court.
Mr. Justice Anwaar Hussain, in his detailed judgment, ruled in favor of the Petitioner, citing multiple legal principles regarding gift transactions, burden of proof, and the presumption of good faith in spousal dealings. The Court framed and addressed two fundamental legal questions:
- Does a wife, as a donee, bear the same burden of proof in a gift transaction as any other donee?
- Can mere allegations of fraud without specific particulars shift the burden of proof to the donee (wife)?
The Court held that a wife (housewife) is not required to meet the same strict evidentiary standard as an ordinary donee when a husband gifts property to her.
The Respondent’s allegations were deemed unsubstantiated, as he failed to provide specific details of the alleged fraud, as required under Order VI Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
Since the gift mutation was recorded in the revenue records, it carried a presumption of truth, which was not effectively rebutted by the Respondent.
The Court noted that the revenue officials, allegedly involved in the fraud, were not made parties to the case, making the suit non-proceedable as per the Supreme Court of Pakistan ruling in Sikandar Hayat Vs. Sughran Bibi (2020 SCMR 214).
The Court clarified that the physical possession of the property remaining with the husband does not invalidate the gift, particularly in cases where the wife is dependent on the husband.
The Lahore High Court allowed the Revision Petition, restoring the trial Court’s judgment and setting aside the Appellate Court’s order. The Court held that the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proving fraud, and the mutation in favor of the wife remained valid.
Powered by Froala Editor
